Hollyweird believes it, so it can't be true.There is as much info to debunk Global warming as there is to support it, but the support gets more air play because it's more fun the scare people and other lemmings.Al Gore invented it along with the internet. All statements are laced with "if" and "could" and not "will" When Krakatoa erupted in 1883 it released more green house gases in one day than man has since he first walked upright. READ THAT AGAIN!Climate experts are never in "consensus" and facts and figures are all over the board with their so call hard cold facts.Man just doesn't have that much power over the planet.Not enough data ... experts are going on about 100 years of data out of 5,000,000,000 years of history. That would be like going to the river getting a glass of water and saying "Well this is what the water is like all over the globe." yeah right.The 1930's are the warmest decade in record. Remember the dust bowl?China builds 3 coal fired power stations a year and 1, only 1 of them releases more green house gases than 1.3 billion SUV's ... here that Hollyweird. Quit griping at me and gripe at China.They got a foot of snow in Texas this year.It was 7 degrees last night at my home in the SOUTH ... that's not warming no matter how you slice it.Nearly every METEOROLOGIST think it's garbage. What would they know, thay only make a living predicting the weather.

I could go on but you get the point.

Now if you disagree with me that is fine, don;t give me that core sample argument of long term weather history ... again a tiny little bubble of air from 2 miles down is not going to tell you squat about global conditions. It will tell you about that tiny little bubble of air and that's it.

History is riddled with doomdayers, and so far they ALL have been wrong.The world would end in the year 1000 ... it didn'tAgain in 2000 ... it didn'tY2K? remember that scare and nothing happened!Remember the Bird Flu where it was going to cross over and kill half of mankind last year ... did that happen or am I in a tiny little bubble too.

I just went outside a little while ago and it has to be in the 80's. It's HOT! But I'm in California and the weather here is usually in the 70 and 80's. We have our weird share of weather now and then but this has been going on for years, some years worse than others. When the years come with the unusual weather they talk more about global warming. I think they run out of ideas on how to scare the s#%t out of us so they bring up the global warming. According to all these science channels and history channels, volcanoes, meteors, earthquakes, and even the sun that is going to blow up, will beat the global warming. So there I've said it, but I'm not a genius by far.

Yes, the earth is going through a warm up phase. My uncle has done tree ring from Canada, Mongolia, Siberia and Arch Angel; definitely the trees are growing quicker these days than they have for the last 500 years.

The question really should be what is causing the warming. There is increased sunspots these days which means greater solar output and thus more energy reaching earth. Also, our magnetic field is decreasing (and we are long overdue, IIRC, for a magnetic pole flip) thus allowing even more solar (and other types of energies from space) energy to reach us. Plus, the earth's climate has always been dynamic, i.e., inherently unstable and changing. Various climate changes have also occured rapidly, over the course of a century. What's happening today is no different.

Now, I don't have a problem with trying to be more energy efficient, as it should make things cheaper; not to mention the world having to rely less on mideast oil -- and stop funding violent & repressive regimes.

I really don't know the facts and figures behind these findings, but I can tell you that it is getting hotter here every year, and we are getting drier and drier.

About 10 or so years ago it would always rain in winter right when I left school. Now we're lucky to get more than a solid two days of rain in, even in winter.

I'm sure there's a lot of validity to these arguments about Global Warming, but it's a dicey situation because it's not a sure thing, and I really don't see how you can ever be sure in this situation. There's just too many variables to deal with, but I personally think its worth paying attention to: Its better we be wrong about it being a big deal rather than ignoring a potential problem. That and it would be nice to have cleaner air etc etc, even if that doesn't affect weather patterns.

I recently read about somekind of sample someone took from the ice in Antarctica. The ice sample showed them that over the past like 200 years or something like that the ice has melted several inches and refrozen something like 5 times. Which shows that there is a cycle to this. The planet goes through a warm phase then it will go through a cool phase. It always balences out.

Like I've said Al "Mr Internet" Gore and his band of chicken Little's are going on very selective and limited data. Most of them just follow suit and due no critical thinking of their own. Al said it, it's got to be true. Not just him, but many that lead these battle cry and their little Indians that follow.Should we take care of the planet? Yes 100% YES!Should we recycle? Again yes.Should we find cleaner energy? Abso-freakin'-lutelyWe need to be good stewards of the earth but we do not need these hyped up scare stories of doomsday is just around the bend.You can be responsable keeper of the planet without being a loon!

Well said, Cheeze. I don't usually like to post "me too" type posts, but that absolutely deserves a "here here."

The current environmental movement has set up a false dichotomy - jump on all the bandwagons or be AGAINST clean air/water/etc; agree with us on EVERYTHING, or believe the earth should be reduced to a skinking pile of chemical goo.

FWIW, I know a LOT of political conservatives that are good at conservation. They practice it and live it. They don't just talk about it at rallies.

I've lived in California all my life, except for a couple of years in Idaho, and I can see the mountains more often now. Maybe 15 days out of the year you can't see them,(because of smog) it's usually during the summer when it's 90 and above. 10 years ago if you came here from out of town you wouldn't even know there were mountains there unless you drove right up to them. So I think all of us pitching in to help the environment is helping. Why don't they tell us when we're doing something right instead of telling us only the wrong doing? They sound like bad parents to me....okay I'm done...I feel better now..

I guess I'll add my "amen, brother" to what's being said. The big issue is not whether the globe is warming, but whether it's a natural warming phase or a man-made phenomenon (because, although man is merely a random offshoot of animal evolution, he is outside of nature and anything he does is, by nature, evil in regards to the rest of the planet, although there is no such thing as evil or good because, well, they are man-made constructs and therefore meaningless unless applied to white males, who all should be eradicated because they are obviously hopelessly evil. Except for Al Gore and Al Franken, and maybe Al Einstein, but he's iffy). The "philosophy" of global warming is such a mishmash of hypocritical hogwash that, even if I was shown empirical evidence of mankind's role in climate change, I'd be looking for flaws because I simply can't trust the "climate scientists" that are making the claims. And yes, I know that was a hugely confusing parenthetical statement.

In a Weather Channel blog, Heidi Cullen says that any meteorologist who doesn't believe that global warming is mainly a man-made phenomenon should be decertified by the American Meteorological Society. Questioning the "science" should apparently be rewarded with loss of credibility and possible loss of livelihood. And when criticized mercilessly for her stance, mainly with cries that her stance amounts to censoring debate on the matter, she at this point still refuses to back down, although she claims she wants a free discussion (apparently "free" of dissenting evidence or opinions). And now "climate scientists" worldwide (our motto: "You can trust us. We're scientists. We do science.") are claiming that it is a foregone conclusion that man is causing climatic instability. As others have stated, it is indeed our duty to act responsibly in regards to our environment (as one comedian put it, "even a dog knows not to go where it drinks"), but I have yet to hear an unbiased debate on the matter. Is that asking too much? Apparently.

/end rant

Logged

"They tap dance not, neither do they fart." --Greensleeves, on the Fig Men of the Imagination, in "Twice Upon a Time."

The problem with this type of subject is that no one who has a reasonable or rational opinion, or reasonable and logical arguments for or against this theory, and that's what it is, gets any media coverage, only the extremists do because that sells papers and gets ratings. Thats why we now have a whole lot of people on both sides of this and all the other"buzz word" topics who have formed their ideas and opinions based on exaggerations and propaganda.I blame the mainstream media for this, I believe that thanks to network news shows most people now get their current events "facts" in thirty second sound bites, and those only cover the most ratings worthy portions of the story, as an example of this whenever ratings week comes to the Greater Los Angeles area all the news programs run segments about sex crimes, the wild antics of celebrities, Victoria's secret models, NFL cheer leaders and so on, not that this stuff isn't news, but why is there always so much of it at ratings time.If you watch the science channels on cable, and you have to watch a number of shows as they cover one side to the other, you'll see that the jury is still out on this one and that now a lot of scientists are thinking global warming may trigger another ice age, but they're not sure. One thing they do say is that if this were to happen it would take fifteen to fifty years(depends on who is speaking) for it to happen and that we would know about it as it progresses, not going to happen in a couple days as in The Day After Tomorrow. What is needed here is some calm and objective investigation, not hysteria.

« Last Edit: February 05, 2007, 11:34:41 PM by DENNIS »

Logged

Science claims that hydrogen, because there is so much of it, is the building block of the universe, I dispute this, there is plenty more stupidity, and that is the building block of the universe. Frank Zappa

The other thing you have to factor into this is that right now, Climate Change (the more "appropriate" term) is now academia's research cash cow. You are almost guaranteed funding if your proposal covers studying Climate Change, its effects or "how long we got." In the early 90's, when I was in grad school doing academic research, it was the Ozone Hole. There's always some catastrophe to avert, and "we scientists are the ones to fix it!!"

In other words, there is a financial incentive for a lot of these guys to be saying what they are saying. Doom and gloom not only sells, it pays, too.